Common CRA Audit Triggers

Common Audit Triggers

Audits in Canada are typically assigned randomly. There are, however, some reasons as to why some taxpayers are audited more often that others.

Here are some of the most common factors which may increase the chance of being audited by the CRA, from most common to least:

 

Screwing around with Trust Funds

Sorry to be so blunt, but there is nothing that raises the ire of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) more than finding out, or suspecting that you have been less than honest with Trust Funds – the money taken from employees or customers and held in trust for the CRA.

In these instances, the CRA comes to audit fast, and leave no stone unturned.

Self-employment income

The addition of self-employment income, along with or instead of T4 income is an area of significant concern for the CRA.

Earning T4 income, means is likely that the sufficient amounts of tax, CPP and EI have been withheld and remitted to the CRA on your behalf and on behalf of your employer, making it low-risk.

Self-employed individuals, on the other hand, do not, in most cases, have taxes withheld at source, making it more under the scope of the CRA.

The Industry you operate in

This is a two-fold flag because not only are some sectors audited more than others – dentists, real estate agents, restaurants, construction companies, and corner stores that take cash, for example, but the CRA also uses the industry that all businesses / taxpayers operate in, and compares the numbers reported to those of the others in your industry.

If you stand out for one reason or another, expect to be asked why, in the form of an audit.

Additionally, in around November of each year, the CRA computers match and compare many pieces of taxpayer information, looking for slips which were not declared, or for outliers.

3rd Party audits

Often times taxpayers are audited simply because a related party is being audited. Sometimes this means that family members or shareholders of a closely-held corporation are audited in the course of the audit of the corporation. Other times various corporations in a supply chain may be audited because of the audit of one of them. Sometimes contractors are audited because of a payroll audit at the corporate level.

There is nothing that can be done to minimize this risk factor. Unfortunately, the more businesses and taxpayers that a particular taxpayer is involved with, the greater likelihood of a CRA audit.

We represented a construction company which had immaculate books and records, yet were under audit by the CRA for almost a year. It made no sense, because every single item requested by the auditor matched and was reported correctly.

It finally came to light that a customer of this company from 8-years-ago had tried to commit fraud and claim a receipt for services which were never performed by this company (they had changed the date and written “CASH” across the invoice).

After proving the invoice was fraudulent, the audit suddenly ceased and the taxpayer who changed the invoice was charged with fraud.

You just never know!

Informant Leads Line Tips

The Informant Leads Line / or Tips line or Snitch line, has provided way more tax and audit leads that the CRA could have ever imagined – and still does.

In light of the fact that tips relating to offshore tax evasion may yield a reward for the informant, it may never end.

Moral of the story: taxpayers who are cheating the system should not count on staying under CRA’s radar forever. They should also be careful as to who has incriminating evidence which could be reported to the CRA.

Common leads come from; ex-spouses, former employees, and neighbours. So the next time you piss someone off, you might want to make sure they don’t reported you to the CRA.

Living Beyond your means – Net Worth Assessments

Taxpayers who live in a $4 million dollar house, and who report income of $1/year, can expect to have caught the attention of the CRA. The same goes for taxpayers who have debt to the CRA and are unable to pay, yet post publicly on their social media of their travels and lavish expenditures.

Lifestyles which appears to be incongruent with the amount of declared income can expect to be audited.

Using your Vehicle for business / Claiming vehicle expenses

Vehicle expenses are often arbitrarily determined. When preparing their tax return, often times taxpayers and their accountants pick a reasonable number for vehicle expenses based on an estimate of the percentage of the vehicle usage used for business purposes.

Few taxpayers actually keep a log of every trip, yet every one should!

Not having a log, and corresponding calendar means that few taxpayers can prove to the CRA with absolute certainty, the use of a vehicle for business purposes – thus making it easy for the CRA to deny the expenses.

Real estate transaction

Thank you Liberal government and your out of control spending.

As a result of the need for tax revenue to pay down the debt and deficit, the CRA began cracking down on real estate transactions in the past 5-years. Had the Liberals won a majority government in the 2019 Federal election, there would be capital gains taxes on the sale of principal residences. Right now, it is a requirement for Canadians to track and list on their tax returns the sale of their principal residence.

To say that the CRA pays careful attention to real estate transactions would be an understatement. The CRA frequently audits HST rebates, pre-sale condo flips, new home construction, principal residence exemptions, and many other real estate transactions.

Being involved in multiple real estate transactions sharply increases the chance of being audited.

Home office expenses

The CRA loves auditing home office expenses. Home office expenses are often arbitrary and over-declared, along with the percentage of time the home office is actually used, and the percentage of the house used for the purpose of earning income.

Operating a cash business

When there is a lot of cash being received by a merchant, there is more opportunity for the CRA to recover taxes on undeclared cash income. One common trick the CRA will perform involves the deposits going into the business or personal bank account which are significant, repetitive or unsupported. In these instances, they are declared as income, and a 50% gross negligence penalty is applied.

Adjustments / Amending returns

The CRA is on top of the business or taxpayer who declares a little income and then amends their returns after the fact to report the actual, and much higher balance. Not only is the prohibited, but it’s a great way to be audited.

If the amending  results in a refund, or a refund is issued and then the correct filing results in a balance outstanding, then – you can expect an audit.

Donations – Large and Tax Shelters

If charitable contributions are suspiciously large and do not seem to be possible or likely within the confines of a taxpayer’s income, such donations or contributions are very likely to be audited.

As well, charitable contributions made to organizations suspected of being involved in tax schemes are even more likely to be subjected to an audit.

As long as there are taxes there will be individuals and organizations selling (and conning) taxpayers into participating in tax schemes to reduce taxes. Some of these schemes are outright frauds, while others have no fraudulent intent, but for one reason or another fail.

The Canada Revenue Agency actively and aggressively audits taxpayers who are involved in a tax shelter, a gifting program, or any other tax scheme.

In many circumstances, taxpayers are able to receive refunds and benefits from these programs for several years prior to the CRA auditing, and then reassessing the donation. Unfortunately, since it can take a bit for the CRA to learn of the scheme, and refunds are issued / debts reduced, the participants often bring in family and friends and get them caught up in the program.

Typically, in these schemes, taxpayer may receive tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of CRA refunds to which they were never entitled only to have the CRA come back and audit and reassess years later, along with gross negligence penalties and interest. $100,000 in illegitimate refunds can turn into more than $200,000 once penalties and interest and the passage of time have been taken into consideration.

The rule of thumb is that if it appears too good to be true, it is.

Shareholder loans

Shareholder loans which are not repaid within a year after the year-end of the corporation are often audited, because the CRA suspects they are not legitimate and were simply paper transactions.

Loans where shareholders took revolving loans from the corporation, paying each off just prior to the deadline and then taking a new loan, are also on the CRA’s radar for audit due to their tax benefits.

It shouldn’t need to be said, but taxpayers who are both shareholders and employees of the corporation should be very careful with shareholder home loans, and should have all supporting documentation available.

In order for a home loan to be treated as an employee home loan rather than a shareholder loan, the loan must be made because the person is an employee, rather than because they are a shareholder and should be available to all other employees.

Child-care costs

The CRA regularly conducts mini-audits to ensure that parents who claim childcare expenses maintain proper documentation, and that the children actually attend the establishment for child care and not just for playdates. Claiming childcare for children who hang out with their grandparents a few days a week while the parents are not both working out of the home, would prompt an audit.

Employment expenses

Employees who are issued a T2200 form by their employer are entitled to deduct certain employment expenses from their income. Perhaps the employee has to pay for their own vehicle to travel to sales calls, or perhaps they have to maintain a home office. As long as the employer requires that the employee pays these expenses in respect of their job, they likely can be deducted from income.

Since this is an abused area (each expense is paid for with pre-tax dollars and reduces the overall tax paid by the taxpayer) the CRA audits many employees with the T2200 to ensure that a) their form is properly completed and may be used to deduct the expenses in question and b) each of the expenses claimed was legitimate and for the purposes of their employment, as outlined in the T2200.

Previous audits

If the CRA keeps coming back and auditing and re-auditing every aspect of a business – and if they keep finding issues – that business or taxpayer can expect to be on the audit list for each and every year.

Criminal activity

All business profits are subject to taxes. This includes both legitimate and illegal businesses. As far as the CRA is concerned, if you are earning income you should pay taxes. Period.

So if a taxpayer is accused of or convicted of a crime and the CRA learns about the illegal business which was taking place, they often audit and reassess the taxpayer for taxes on the proceeds of crime – whether or not the taxpayer still has such proceeds. Often times, criminal activity is weeded out during an audit, as opposed to the CRA knowing there is an illegal business and pretending that it is legitimate.

These audits usually require the supporting documentation to justify expenses, and often there are none provided resulting in extremely large assessments.

 

Conclusion:

Keep your records together by year, and expect to be audited each and every year. When you are not, be thankful.

 

The Truth and Myths Around the CRA’s Taxpayer Relief Program

There is quite a lot of information on the Internet around the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) Taxpayer Relief Program (formerly known as fairness).  Understandably, there is also a lot of misinformation around this program.  After having spent almost 11 years working in the CRA – beginning as an entry-level collector and working my way up through the division to a team leader before taking my MBA and heading into the private sector –  I have learned quite a lot about how the Taxpayer Relief program actually works.Myth vs Reality

This post will identify the key objectives of the program straight from the CRA, and then highlights some common myths about the program and the actual fact about why it makes sense to invest considerable time and effort into an application, or engage the services of someone who knows the program inside and out.

The Taxpayer Relief program was set up to allow for the Minister of National Revenue to grant relief from penalty and/or interest when the following types of situations prevent a taxpayer (individual or corporation) from meeting their tax obligations:

  • Extraordinary circumstances;
  • Actions of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA);
  • Inability to pay or financial hardship;
  • Other circumstances

The program distinguishes between “cancelling” and “waiving” of penalties and/or interest as the CRA understands that granting relief to a taxpayer only to see them smothering in penalties and interest again is an exercise in futility.

The term “cancel” refers to a penalty or interest amount that is assessed or charged for which relief is granted, in whole or in part, by the CRA.

The term “waive” refers to a penalty or interest amount that is not yet assessed or charged for which relief is granted, in whole or in part, by the CRA.

The term “Taxpayer” includes individual, employer or payer, corporation, partnership, organization, trust, estate, goods and services tax/harmonized sales tax (GST/HST) registrant or claimant.

Now, you or your client, has been charged penalties and / or interest and you want to know if you qualify.  Look no further than the CRA website, and their section on Taxpayer Relief, here.

Circumstances that may warrant relief include;

Extraordinary circumstances

Penalties or interest may be cancelled or waived in whole or in part when they result from circumstances beyond a taxpayer’s control.  Extraordinary circumstances that may have prevented a taxpayer from making a payment when due, filing a return on time, or otherwise complying with a tax obligation include, but are not limited to, the following examples:

  • Natural or human-made disasters, such as a flood or fire;
  • Civil disturbances or disruptions in services, such as a postal strike;
  • Serious illness or accident; and
  • Serious emotional or mental distress, such as death in the immediate family.

Actions of the CRA

The CRA may also cancel or waive penalties or interest when they result primarily from CRA actions, including:

  • Processing delays that result in taxpayers not being informed, within a reasonable time, that an amount was owing;
  • Errors in CRA material which led a taxpayer to file a return or make a payment based on incorrect information;
  • Incorrect information provided to a taxpayer by the CRA (usually in writing);
  • Errors in processing;
  • Delays in providing information, resulting in taxpayers not being able to meet their tax obligations in a timely manner; and
  • Undue delays in resolving an objection or an appeal, or in completing an audit.

Inability to pay or financial hardship

The CRA may, in circumstances where there is a confirmed inability to pay amounts owing, consider waiving or cancelling interest in whole or in part to enable taxpayers to pay their account. For example, this could occur when:

  • A collection has been suspended because of an inability to pay caused by the loss of employment and the taxpayer is experiencing financial hardship;
  • A taxpayer is unable to conclude a payment arrangement because the interest charges represent a significant portion of the payments; or
  • Payment of the accumulated interest would cause a prolonged inability to provide basic necessities (financial hardship) such as food, medical help, transportation, or shelter; consideration may be given to cancelling all or part of the total accumulated interest.

Consideration would not generally be given to cancelling a penalty based on an inability to pay or financial hardship unless an extraordinary circumstance prevented compliance, or an exceptional situation existed. For example, when a business is experiencing extreme financial difficulty and enforcement of such penalties would jeopardize the continuity of its operations, the jobs of the employees, and the welfare of the community as a whole, consideration may be given to providing relief of the penalties.

Other circumstances

The CRA may also grant relief if a taxpayer’s circumstances do not fall within the situations described above.

The CRA expects these guidelines to be used when applying for relief and that the requests are made within the deadlines for requesting relief, which is limited to any period that ended within 10 years before the calendar year in which a request is submitted or an income tax return is filed.   The 10-year limitation period rolls forward every January 1st.

If filed using the correct form, with sufficient supporting documentation, a response from the Taxpayer Relief Program can take anywhere from 3 months to 2 years due to the amount of requests.  In order to ensure that you are making the best claim possible, you really should engage the services of a professional, as they would be able to assess whether or not your request is sufficient, and they would ensure that you meet all the other conditions which must be in place for the CRA to review and consider your application.

At the end of the day, if you have a reasonable chance of being successful under this program, the investment made to have it written, reviewed or monitored by an expert is a worthwhile expenditure.

Now let’s have a look at some common myths around this program which are floating around the Internet.

Myths

Myth: That the CRA’s Taxpayer Relief program is a one time program and that you had better take your best shot the time you decide to apply.

Reality: Not true,  This program is available to all Canadians who have been charged penalties and / or interest and as such, they have the right to ask for relief each and every time it is warranted.  The Taxpayer Relief Group do not maintain collection inventories and as such they review each case on the merit of its submission without any influence from the permanent collections diary or the collector assigned to the case.

Myth: That the CRA’s Taxpayer Relief Program is used in order for the CRA and a taxpayer to negotiate a deal which would resolve the taxpayer’s debt issue by settling the debt and accepting less than the actual amount owed to them.

Reality: Never, ever, ever!  The CRA does NOT settle debts outside of bankruptcy or a proposal, and they certainly do not use the taxpayer relief program for this purpose.  As a matter of fact, I can speak of a first hand experience where a collector used the word “settle” in the permanent collection diary of a corporation which had paid a principle tax debt of $650,000, because they wanted to fight the $775,000 in penalties and interest through Taxpayer Relief.  The CRA sent back the $650,000 and re-opened negotiation with the corporation because they did not want to set the precedent of settling tax debts through the Taxpayer Relief Program.

Myth: I cannot afford to pay my taxes, so I am not going to file my tax return, and then when I have a debt, I can ask for relief because I had no money?

Reality:  Failure to file a tax return is a criminal offence which can result in prosecution, so you should always file, and be clear to the CRA upfront that money is tight.  But before an application is made to the Taxpayer Relief Program, all outstanding returns must be filed up to date, and all installments must be accounted for.  Otherwise, the application is set aside until everything is current.

Myth: Having a disability or illness from birth qualifies me for Taxpayer Relief.

Reality: Probably not.  If you have managed to conduct your affairs for a period of time without any tax issues, but then something happens which cases the accumulation of penalties and interest, you cannot use your disability or illness when applying for relief, unless something happened during the period in which the penalties and / or interest were applied as a result of a worsening of your disability / illness.  In that case, you would need to substantiate this with supporting letters from your doctors and specialists.  

Myth:  I met with someone who is going to write a letter to the CRA asking for relief and they have sent me the letter to review.  If I sign it, and they send it off, am I now being considered for relief?

Reality:  Not any more.   Years ago, taxpayers were able to send in letters to the fairness department which contained their reasons for asking for relief and some would include supporting documentation, while others would not.  However, since the CRA revamped the Taxpayer Relief Program, they require that the form RC4288 be included in the package or the claim will be rejected.

Myth:  I need to be pre-qualified for the CRA Taxpayer Relief Program.

Reality: No.  You can determine if you may qualify, or you can seek a professional to help you determine if you have grounds for relief, but there is no pre-qualification of this program.

Myth: If my claim is rejected, then I have to pay the penalties and interest.

Reality:  You should make arrangements to pay the penalties and interest in any case in order to stop the interest clock from ticking should the claim be denied – wherever possible, however, the Taxpayer Relief Program allows for a second-level review to be performed (usually with additional information provided) and there is an option for judicial review should the second level review be unfavourable.

 

So take some time to look around when you are considering an application under the Taxpayer Relief Program and make sure that if you engage someone you do so for the right reasons.

CRA Hires New Chief Service Officer. (It wasn’t me, but it should have been me!)

On November 1st, 2018, the CRA announced that as a result of complaints from the public related to “significant service delays”, they have launched a national consultation tour and on this tour will be promoting the appointment of a new Chief Service Officer (CSO).

That position should have been mine, but they never asked, so instead of helping the masses while working at the CRA, I’ll have to continue helping Taxpayers as inTAXicating.

While noting the introduction of a “new suite of services … leading to real results for Canadians”, or a return to the service that the CRA used to give Taxpayers, the CRA is admitting that it has a long way to go in the eyes of Canadians when it comes to providing anything related to “Customer Service”.

In March of 2018, the CRA appointed its first CSO, Mireille Laroche who happens to be a bilingual career public servant with a background in and who previously worked at the Department of Finance.

So much for the CSO helping Taxpayers with Collections issues related to the CRA because for that to happen, the CSO would need actual time working in, you know, Collections.

That being said, the CSO be classified as an Assistant Commissioner of the Service, Innovation and Integration Branch, as well as Chief Data Officer.

The Minister of National Revenue, the Honourable Diane Lebouthillier, has visited a number of remote locations over the past year to discuss service issues promising solutions, but none have come from the CRA.

Stated “improvements” coming from the CRA include; the opening of the Northern Service Centres in territorial capitals, an enhancement of the CRA’s digital services, and the implementation of a new call centre platform because the one they currently use doesn’t meet the needs of Canadians.

A CRA spokeperson stated that, “these service enhancements will address many of the frustrations Canadians have experienced when they interact with the CRA [and] while they will be of significant benefit to Canadians, they are really just the beginning of the CRA’s client-focused approach to service.”

To that statement, I disagree!  I think the public wants to be able to sit down with their Collections representative face-to-face and that the CRA’s insistence of moving collections files to these “hubs” has created additional confusion, unnecessary stress and assessment which would have been resolved in person previously.

In addition to launching both online and in-person public consultations, the CRA is holding a series of “design jams,” which, according to the CRA spokesperson, is “a collaborative brainstorming activity used to solve design problems. It is part of the ‘design thinking toolkit.’ Design jams produce prototypes, pitches, or proposals; it is the equivalent of a ‘hackathon’ but for designers. The focus is on stakeholder and participant empowerment. Rapid ideation is done with all stakeholders involved.”

Time will tell if there will be actual changes being made to the way the CRA interacts with Taxpayers, or if this is just another way for the Federal Liberal government to spend taxpayer money while touting all the “progress” that has been / will be made.

Frequently Asked Tax Question Answered: How do I know if what I read about Tax Debt to the CRA is true?

This is one of the most commonly asked questions of me: How do I know if what I read on the Internet regarding debt to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is true or not?

The answer is quite clear, however, complicated at the same time.

If you owe money to the CRA and you are looking for options, suggestions, or tips on the Internet, you have to pay special attention to the “Solution” options which are advertised as if they are providing legitimate advice.

The most important thing to do is to take note of the terminology used in these ads – over and over again – because the intention of these ads and blog posts are not to help you but to achieve a high SEO (search engine optimization) ranking.  These posts are written to capitalize on the number of eyes who will read that post because of the way it was written, not because it was intended to provide help to you.

Here is an example of a fear mongering ad, disguised as an article on taxes, meant to “help” you.  I am paraphrasing the content, but the example should provide a clear clue as to the true intention of the poster.

Title: Understanding Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) Tax Assessment & Arbitrary Assessments

The sample post: CRA tax assessment is when the Canada Revenue Agency conducts a review of your income taxes. The most common form of CRA tax assessment is the Notice of Assessment that is sent once the CRA has conducted a preliminary review of your tax return. There is another CRA assessment known as “arbitrary assessments.”   These assessments are also known as “notational assessments.” What this means is that, if you have not filed your taxes on time, the CRA could decide to complete and file your return for you.

Many people believe that, if you do not file your taxes, that the CRA will wait until you do file your taxes and then the CRA will penalize you by changing you penalties, fines, and interest.

This is not always true.

The CRA is able to choose to complete an arbitrary assessment in which the Canada Revenue Agency will estimate your income and the tax debt that you owe and then the CRA will charge interest on this debt as required.

The amount of tax debt that comes from a CRA arbitrary assessment will  not be as favourable to you as it would be if you completed your return yourself.

The CRA will use previous income tax statements to complete your return and will not take steps to include expenses or deductions or attempt to give you any tax breaks.

In many cases, the amount owing listed by the CRA will be very high and additional charges, penalties and interest will be charged since the assessment was late.

You will then be subject to CRA collection efforts such as a wage garnishment of up to 100% of your income, or the CRA will empty your bank account and then freeze it so you cannot use it.  They could also put a lien on your house and if you don’t pay them, sell it and keep the proceeds.

What do you do if you Receive a Notational Assessment?

If you receive an arbitrary CRA tax assessment, your options are;

  1. Pay the amount listed
  2. File an appeal of the assessment.
  3. You can also choose to file a return yourself at this point in an attempt to reduce your tax bill, but, this will trigger a CRA audit to ensure that your tax return is filed correctly.

In addition, if the CRA does not have the information it needs in order to complete an arbitrary assessment, it can take you to court where the court can order that you complete the return and pay a court fine.

If you ignore this court order, you could be subject to contempt of court charges and go to jail.

As you can see, your best option is to contact us, and we will help solve this problem.  We have an army of former CRA staff at our disposal who deal with hundreds of these daily.

Let us help keep you out of jail and away from the prying eyes of the CRA.

 

WHEW.

After reading this, if you were not afraid of the CRA, you must be by now.  This blog post started out trying to get people looking for CRA tax solutions and slowly wound its way through a series of lies and mis-truths and took the reader straight to audit and jail.  It just stopped short of proclaiming that King Tax Man was going to descend from the clouds and throw tennis sized hail-balls at you.

This type of article is not good.  It’s not accurate, heck, some of it is not even true.  But how would you know?

What are the red flags that you should notice?

Let’s break down this article and address some of the “facts”.

First paragraph – mentions of CRA, or Canada Revenue Agency – 5 times.  This is their SEO target, clearly.

I was also alarmed that the writer was unable (or unwilling) to state what a Notice of Assessment (NOA) is, and how the CRA actually issues them.  To set the record straight, a Notice of Assessment is the computer generated form which is issued once a change occurs on someone’s tax account.  This NOA carries with it a legal warning from which the CRA are able to take collections actions.

An additional lie occurred when the author stated that your tax return is looked over once it is filed.  In truth, no one has reviewed your tax return.  The data entry group take the paper-filed returns and just enter the information in the system.  Electronically filed tax returns are run through a program aimed at identifying any obvious errors or inaccurate deductions taken.

There is the idd case where the CRA will flag and wait for your tax return, however try not filing for 20-years and being under audit regularly, and then you can get to that level.

Canada’s tax system is a self-reporting system so the information is accepted as filed, and the Audit, or Verification department are responsible for checking the information to make sure it is correct after the fact.

Another HUGE issue, is that there is a significant difference between an arbitrary assessment and a notional assessment.

Arbitrary assessments are issued for personal (T1) taxes and occur when the CRA’s non-filer group, or a CRA collector takes information on your personal tax account for that current year, plus previous years and prepare the unfiled tax return for you, less deductions.

In many cases, they are pretty accurate.

A notional assessment is specific to GST/HST and in these cases the non-filer unit or the collections unit will assess an amount owing for each period outstanding based on a suggested amount the system provides.  That suggested amount is a combination of the previous filings, and the industry or SIC code that is associated to your file.

In both cases, returns can be filed and the assessments removed, however, Notices of Objection should be attached just to provide recourse should the filings not be accepted.

Filing the missing returns does not trigger an audit.

The whole piece about the CRA taking you to court, etc., makes absolutely no sense as it’s not even true.  Arbs and Notionals are based on information in the CRA’s systems.  If the CRA doesn’t have information, they can still raise an assessment.

I suspect the writer was just trying to close out the reasons for using them by tieing in the jail / court fine, for not complying.  It’s not true at all, but it makes for a compelling story!

If the intention of the article was to really assist Taxpayers and let each and every Canadian decide if they want to pay for assistance / expertise, then all they had to do was discuss prosecution which is what the CRA can and will do if repeated attempts to file have been issued from the CRA (Demand to File) and have not produced the returns.

Maybe they didn’t know that existed…

Maybe they were not aware that failing to file is a criminal offense, if the CRA asks for the returns and they are not provided.

Certainly, they did not want you to know that failing to pay is not.

If someone looked at the above post, they would panic, contact this firm, and likely be convinced to pay a lot of money for something they could likely do themselves because they don’t want to make it worse, or go to jail.

It’s hard to get the truth out there when there are people and firms distorting the facts in order to make a profit off of taxpayers lack of understanding of how the CRA works.

Additionally, if they intentionally muddled the facts in this post to scare you into using their services, what other information have they creatively adjusted?

Or, if they believe this to be the truth, then they just don’t have the experience or expertise to know better, and do you really want to use them to represent you in dealings with the CRA?

Outcome:

I questioned the author in an online social media forum.  I said, “I’ve always understood that an arbitrary assessment was specific to T1 returns and that they were actually quite accurate because most of the information used is already posted to your T1 account, whereas a notional assessment was specific to GST/HST and those figures were based on the industry or SIC code. Can you confirm this is your understanding as well?”

He never responded…

Surprised?

I’m not.

When you have CRA tax collections problems then you need the expertise of the firm with an actual former CRA tax collector.  inTAXicating Tax Services.

Visit us at http://www.inTAXicating.ca

CRA Acting Unusually, or Cabot Business To Be Charged With Tax Evasion

In what is either a case of the CRA acting in an unusual manner, or a business has misplayed their hand  – and is being charged with tax evasion under the Income Tax Act (ITA) and the Excise Tax Act (ETA).

Time will tell who is in the wrong.

The CBC has reported that a St. John’s car dealership and a director of the dealership, are being accused of tax evasion and making false and deceptive statements on tax returns by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).

The CRA filed charges under the ITA and the ETA against Cabot Ford Lincoln Sales Limited and director Frank Clarke, for the 2009-2011 taxation years.

The CRA has alleged in their court documents that Cabot Ford overstated their expenses in those 3-year by more than $240,000 in order to evade taxes owing by around $45,000 and on the GST side, they underpaid around $14,000 in GST through “false or deceptive statements” provided on their GST returns.

The director, is accused of personally evading more than $76,000 in taxes by failing to declare more than $270,000 in income over that same three-year period.

What I find really unusual, is that this case is not yet before the courts, so just by reading this, we are automatically coming to the conclusion that this company and director have done something illegal, however, that might not be true.  The director told the CBC that they are “still trying to understand everything ourselves, especially since the Canada Revenue Agency has not yet informed us of all details of the situation.”

If that is the case, having this go public is the worst case scenario for the business if the CRA’s claims turn out to be true.

On the other hand, if the CRA’s claims turn out to be false, then this would be another case where the CRA have stepped beyond their means to force an issue which was incorrect or inaccurate.

The director believes that the investigation is still underway, when he told the CBC that he [has] “been in touch with the CRA during their investigation and will continue to co-operate with them as this all moves forward.”

The charges were filed last week, and the matter is scheduled to be back at provincial court in St. John’s on March 26th.

We will be watching to see if this gets resolved ahead of time and what the long-term repercussions of this position taken by the business and by the CRA will be.

I would like to say that I would never let the CRA issue a press release about a client of mine which could do harm to their day-to-day viability – these issues can always be worked out in advance, however, not knowing all the details, it’s hard to say why this was done and who pushed for it.

If you have tax troubles with the CRA, or need them to stand down or back off, you need to contact inTAXicating Tax Services!  Visit our website at www.intaxicating.ca, or email us at info@intaxicating.ca

Former CRA Collections expertise to help resolve a CRA Collections problem.

Why inTAXicating Tax Posts Rank Higher than the CRA?

Anyone else get a lot of SEO Spam?

SEO, in case you were not aware is the acronym for Search Engine Optimization, and is a marketing technique which focuses on growing the visibility of your web-site through non-paid search engine results.

To get a higher ranking website, you need a combination of good content and your site has to hit the right keywords.  Doing this will drive traffic to the website, and all of this helps the search engines know that your site needs to be shown to people searching for whatever you have written about.

It stands to reason then, that just because you created a web-site (or blog) it doesn’t mean that anyone will see it or read it.  The site has to be “indexed”, meaning that it needs to show up in search engines, and it gets indexed by having people show up and visit the site.

The more visitors, the higher the ranking.

What does SEO spam have to do with inTAXicating and the CRA?

Quite a lot, actually.

In and amongst the spam we get on our website, the majority of pitches are from SEO companies who promise to help me get this website on the “first page of Google”.

Now, I know that a lot of these inquiries are spam because they are fraudulent – trying to steal identities and money – however there are some real companies who reach out to help me improve my site’s ranking, and to those companies – and to ANY company who is going to take the time to make a pitch any company, I offer this advice.

At the very least, before you reach out, you really need to check to see that you are offering a service which they actually need?

You see, there are many inTAXicating blog posts which already come up on the first page of Google.  Some, in fact, come up first or second.  Many even come up before the Canada Revenue Agency!

So thank you for the offer to get me on the first page of Google searches.  If I was even going to consider using your services at any point in time, and you have not taken the time to see that, what less obvious things have you missed?

Business fail because they do not take the time to check their prospective client(s) out and they end up making a pitch which shows there is no attention to detail being paid.

In the meantime, if our blog posts are ranking higher on Google – and we do not promote, or pay for any ads – then you know where a large number of Canadians are going to find answers for their tax problems and to find resources to help them in their dealings with the CRA.

Even the CRA sometimes contacts us for feedback regarding the way they have written something to see if our understanding represents the message that the CRA is trying to get across.

If you, or anyone you know has a tax issue with the Canada Revenue Agency, then they need to contact us, at inTAXicating Tax Services.  We rank higher than the CRA on CRA tax matters for a reason.

Email us here: info@intaxicating.ca

 

CRA Charge 4 “Tax Protestors” in Quebec with Tax Evasion

The Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) have charged a quartet of “tax protesters” in Québec with tax fraud, alleging that the 4 operated a scheme which helped over 50 participants evade more than $1 million in federal income tax.

Allegations, not yet proven in court, claim that they advised 50 taxpayers to claim losses totalling more than $19 million in losses, or close to $1.08 million in federal income tax.

Pierre Cardin and Sylvain Quirion of Montreal, Jean-Marc Paquin from Laval, and Contrecoeur resident Guylaine Tremblay were arrested and released with a promise to appear, and court-imposed conditions, the CRA reported.

The CRA used this opportunity to reiterate its warning against getting involved with tax protestors, noting that Canadian courts have consistently rejected these schemes.

“For those involved in tax protester schemes, the CRA will reassess income tax, calculate interest and impose penalties,” the announcement says. “In addition, upon a conviction for tax evasion, the court may impose a fine between 50% and 200% of the tax evaded and a jail term of up to five years.”

Earlier this year, the CRA issued an alert about tax schemes claiming that, “natural people” are not subject to tax laws, because it’s not true.

“Individuals who promote such views are “tax protesters” who not only fail to report their own earnings, but they also try to convince others to engage in these illegal activities,” the CRA said in the alert.

The CRA has always kept an eye on these sorts of schemes and regularly uses the opportunity to promote situations where charges are laid, or where the court charges fraudsters in order to remind Canadians to steer clear of this type of tax evasion.

Recently, the CRA reported that, between 2006 and 2017, 75 promoters had been convicted in connection with these kinds of schemes, resulting in $7.15 million in fines and a total of 936 months of jail time.

If someone is charging you money to teach you how to pay less tax, you might want to steer clear.

If, however, you have taken part in a scam, or scheme, or if you believe that you are a “natural person” and that taxation does not apply to you, please send me an email to info@intaxicating, so we can discuss the very significant consequences which you can face.

I won’t judge you.  I’ll listen, and I’ll explain and answer questions.